Indian tribe sues S.C. over gaming

COLUMBIA, S.C. — South Carolina's only federally recognized Indian tribe argues in a lawsuit that laws governing casino cruise ships off the state's coast also mean gaming should be allowed on the tribe's reservation.

In the suit filed Tuesday, the Catawba Indian Nation also asks that local authorities be prevented from seizing gaming machines while the lawsuit moves forward.

The 2,600-member tribe was officially recognized under a 1993 settlement, receiving 640 acres. The transfer followed a heated 13-year legal fight about an 1840 treaty that the Catawbas said illegally took away 144,000 acres of their land. The settlement also provided the tribe with $50 million along with restoring its rights as a nation.

Attorneys for the Catawbas also say that agreement gives the tribe the right to conduct games to the extent they are allowed anywhere else in the state. In 2005, state legislators passed the Gambling Cruise Act, which set rules and regulations for gaming ships that are allowed to operate three miles off the ship's coastline.

The Catawbas have long tried to capitalize on the known economic benefits that come from tribal gaming operations, which in 2009 generated $26.2 billion in gross revenue across the country, according to the National Indian Gaming Association.

The Catawbas sued the state in 2005, saying the tribe needed to open a video gambling parlor to recoup profits lost at its Rock Hill bingo hall when South Carolina began a statewide lottery in 2002. The tribe also argued that the 1993 settlement allowed them to have video poker, even though the machines were outlawed statewide years earlier.

At the time, state prosecutors argued that if the Catawbas were allowed to offer video gambling on their York County reservation, the door would open for "unrestricted, uncontrolled and unregulated" video poker in South Carolina, also arguing that the land deal subjects the tribe to state gambling laws.

A judge ruled in the tribe's favor, but the state Supreme Court ultimately overturned the decision. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.